I have an Athlon 2500+ system with 1GB RAM and a Radeon 9800 SE (softmodded to Pro). I am generally happy with my frame rates, but I think I can do better ;-)What do think should I upgrade first? CPU or graphic board?I was thinking either of an Athlon 64 3000+ or some graphic ATI x-series board.Thanks!

Hi,CPUHope this helps,JimActiveSky Sales and Supporthttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpg http://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_proud_supporter.jpg

Here's an option if you haven't considered it to date: why not just get frame-rate friendly cloud and ramp textures. That will significantly improve the overall performance of your flight simulator and avoid the $400 chunk of change for a new processor or video card.Freeware cloud textures = FS sky worldPayware = flight environmentMy own personal experience with both has been very satisfactory with both.Ramp textures are more difficult to find. My experience with Airport Environment textures, while beautifully and artfully done, really slows my own system down. However, payware packages, particularly the exquisite Rhode Island and Paris Base Pack and the Fly Tampa series, have managed to create ramp textures that are incredibly realistic and beautiful with no impact on frame rates. Just as a side note I really do personally enjoy the Rhode Island scenery - one of my students and I recently flew into KPVD on an instructional flight and geez it was like I had flown into KPVD all of my life the scenery really was that true to life. Even the unicom sign on one of the FBO's hanger was accurately presented. I was really just kind of blown away

Definitely the CPU. With the 9800 softmodded there is going to be minimal, if any, framerate gain from a new video card. The current framerate is limited by the existing CPU, not the 9800.Doug

Before you invest any additional upgrading on your system in the hope of getting higher framerates, the real question is how do you get a smooth running FS2004 with no stutters and outstanding scenery with no shimmering.Since you own an ATI Radeon, I offer you the opportunity to look in the "TIPS and TRICKS" section of this forum, and try the settings I suggested for ATI Radeon 9700/9800 PRO owners.Getting a smooth running simulation isn't all about having a high number FPS count on your screen. Depending on the horsepower of your system and its graphic processing power, FPS is simply that magical number when everything seems to come in sync and you reach "Simulation Nirvana." For me that magical number was 16 FPS with absolutely no stutters.Anyway, take a look at my post, and after the tweak settings through the ATI card's Control Panel, Fs9.cfg, and the program settings, let me know if you get favorable results.Hope it helps!Keith (DevilDog_1722)

CPU all the way. I went from a 2.8 P4 to a 3500+ and the difference was staggering.Adam

Actually, after reviewing some 3DMark 2005 benchmarks, I am not so sure that I would benefit a lot upgrading my CPU. The benchmarks indicate that I would get an about 3x higher benchmark result with a GeForce 6600GT (as opposed to my "9800Pro" soft-modded Radeon 9800SE). Upgrading to an Athlon 64 3000+ (now Athlon XP 2500+) would only result in about 1/3 increase.If someone could elaborate how and why a CPU upgrade should benefit FS9 despite the benchmarks... great!Thanks ;-)

Hi,Because FS04 is heavy on the CPU and a bit lighter on the GPU. In your case if you bump your GPU up, it will be sitting there waiting for your CPU to process everything it needs to process, and that would be a waste.Please do not use 3DMark, as it really will not translate well to FS04 actual useage.Hope this helps,JimActiveSky Sales and Supporthttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpg http://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_proud_supporter.jpg